Hi! Having a great experience with HRC, really an amazing tool. Have one question though.

When I use the "Multi table" ICM equity model. How does HRC know how many players are currently left, or how short people on other tables are?

If you select the MTT model you will see an additional configuration page when you click Next at the bottom.

HRC can make an educated guess for you if you entered the total chips in play as part of the tournament structure, otherwise you will need to specify # remaining and avg stacks there.

Just downloaded the trial version. Lots of small but key improvements from a couple of years ago. Good work.

Just a few things:
1) It used to be possible to copy the whole solution to the clipboard (I think either directly, or it used to be possible to copy-paste it from the screen that came up after the user clicked export) is the only way to get it now to export to .txt then open the .txt file? I can still copy an individual line from the main window, just not everything together.

2) Is it/would it be possible under FGS to set how many hands to the next blind level and what the next blind level is going to be. As well as the obvious application for making sure the UTG knows what big blind he's paying on the following hand, it would give nicer results when using FGS in advanced hand mode. Deciding the remainder of the tournament with a 30BB jamming war is probably more accurate than Malmuth-Harville, but if I could make the blinds increase sharply and have a 10BB jamming war that would probably be better.

3) User-defined position names would be nice. This "MP2" stuff is meaningless - the user keeps having to count through to see if it means the lowjack, the hijack and so on, or whatever terminology they personally use.

4) Is there a place to set the default number of iterations for Nash calculation? 300 is often not enough and I have to redo it from the Nash Calculation menu.

1) Still there at Hand: Export Strategies, you can copy/paste the full tree there.

2) That's possible already. There is a "Model Options" setting below the equity model selection, you can enable a blind increase there.

3) Idk, this seems like a feature that <1% of users ever end up using. Pretty much whatever the default position names are, you will get used to them after a short while and only a tiny minority of users would ever bother to change them even if they prefer a slightly different naming convention. Could certainly be wrong about this, but i think this request came up maybe 2-3 times in the almost 10 years since launch.

4) Not possible at the moment, but I can look into that.

1) Thanks, I was probably pressing the wrong key before

2) Great, found that now.

3) If not then can you at least rename "MP3" to HJ? I think, similar to CO, it's one that's used and recognised by everyone now.

4) To add to this, I have a pretty low-spec computer (a refurbished desktop for Word etc) and it runs 300 quick enough even for me. As computers have probably moved on a lot since the original 300 was set, maybe the default number of reps could increase to 500 or 1000, if you don't have time to make it user-defined - or maybe it should even be time-based.

I ran some bubble spots where I want to 3b jam as bis stack versus an active middle stack and if I edit the call 3b jam range of the middle stack by just 2.5% it changes my 3b jam range from 100% to 10%! How am I supposed to have any effective ranges to use when ranging the opponent is so sensitive to such a small increase in the hands they call with? Thanks for your help as always. We appreciate the fast and helpful responses.

It is not uncommon for bubble spots that ranges are very sensitive to minor changes in opponents' strategies. I'm afraid there is no simple solution here. This is a good opportunity to check out the plotting options to get a better understanding of the dynamics.

In this case studying both best response plots may be useful:
1) Right click the 3b-call range, Plot: Range v Best Response, select your 3b jam range. This will show your best response + associated EVs depending on the callling range.
2) Right click the 3b-jam range, Plot: Range v Best Response, select the 3b call range. This will show how your EV behaves depending on your range, if your opponent adjusts correctly.

I published a small update earlier today, including the "Adj. Blinds" display in the Outline tooltips that was requested above.

This is the current naming scheme depending on # players:
How about this?

I'd definitely prefer it that way with HJ, yes, and I think I'm in the majority.

I'm probably still in the minority with LJ (for the position to the left of the HJ), so we can probably let that one go. (I play a lot of 5 max SNGs anyway )

Well ranging players like that is what poker is all about. It's similar in river spots, if the person with the condensed range is calling just a bit more than he "should", the guy with the polarised range finds that suddenly none of his bluffs are profitable. If he's calling a bit less than he should then suddenly any bluffing candidate is possible - so a small change in one player's range makes possible up a much larger change in another player's range .The cases in the middle where you're choosing between no-hope hands based on card removal are a rare case - but it's the starting point to for looking at how much people "should" be doing things.

The ranges calculated with multiple players unlocked (IMHO) should be just the starting point.

In terms of this preflop tool - it's always interesting how deciding that a fish with sometimes make a bad call with A8o or A7o changes the carefully calculated GTO ranges with the suited wheel aces based on the assumption that if villains are only calling with broadway aces then then the kicker strength doesn't matter so go for the straights.

You probably know this already, but when you use the blind increase function, then you start a new hand, the program doesn't "remember" this setting from the previous hand you did (whereas the window to set up the new hand already has most of the other stuff like stacks, prizes etc. from the last hand pre-filled in).

Yeah, that's intentional because it's so specific to the particular hand. I think the risk of leaving it on unintentionally would heavily outweight the few times where you save a few clicks when you actually want to leave it enabled for the following calculation.

Thanks <3

would it be possible to name the tabs? right now it is Hand 1..x but being able to name it would make it easier to lern different spots. Thanks a lot

^ I'm currently working on full local save/load support, renaming tabs will be part of that functionality. I know save/load has been long overdue, shouldn't take much longer though.

-

The new default position names are in today's update.

Re: the above, it would be nice if it showed somewhere what the settings were that created a hand. I think we get them if we hover over the tab marker, but it would be nice to have them on the tab too - maybe in the (often empty) space at the bottom of the treeview.

Probably, depends a bit how someone is using the program though.

Yeah, that's already planned as part of the save/load functionality. This will then be available for all hands obviously, not just loaded ones.

Hi, I have two questions.

In the ICM calculations, there is no future EV calculated within the sims right?

Further more, when I adjust the ranges, and I want to see the best response against that new range, do I have to run fictitious play again every time to get a 'more accurate' best response?
Or do I just click best response and it's good enough ( if there's a difference, what's the best Iterations I should use to rerun?)

Thanks.

The ICM model will just directly plug in the Malmuth/Harville tournament equity estimates. While these are estimates for the full remaining tournament, no actual play is simulated.

FGS on the other hand simulates a few rounds of play and then plugs in ICM equities for the last simulated round. The difference here is that FGS will actually calculate/simulate strategies for the next few hands while ICM simply plugs in stacks+prizes into Malmuth/Harville to get an estimate for the tournament equity.

So both methods try to estimate the equity for the remaining tournament, FGS just does so in a more elaborate way.

Best response simply selects all +EV hands of the chosen range. In most cases this is NOT what you want.

Using "Run Nash Calculation" will adjust all unlocked strategies to your changes. It calculates a new Nash Equilibrium for all unlocked ranges, while the locked ranges are treated as set in stone. (As for the algorithm choice: For simple hands Fictitious Play is typically slightly faster, if you have troubles getting Exploit% to converge to 0 for more complex hands then try CFR+.)

OK,

Thank you for explaining. So when do I use the Nash calculation instead of the Fictitious play. And what are the differences in outcome?

Also, when should I use CFR+ and what does that mean exactly? It's hard to understand this as I'm having trouble understanding these technical terms/words. Let alone knowing when to use which one if that makes sense.

So can I simplify these options as in knowing which one to use for what calculation?

Fictitious Play and CFR+ are both algorithms that approximate a Nash Equilibrium. The "Run Nash Calculation" option will give you the choice between Fictitious Play and CFR+.

From a user's perspective it's enough to know that both algorithms calculate the same thing, if you run enough iterations then you will end up with the same result. For most hands it simply doesn't matter which of the two you use.

I'd recommend you use Fictitious Play as default. If you can't get the Exploit% values in the Outline area close to zero then try CFR+ instead.

Thanks!

Hi, How do i work out my shoving range in a spot where button flat calls and I'm in the SB? This is a final table calc with 4 left so ICM is a factor due to pay jumps and stack sizes.

1) Start an "Advanced Hand" calculation from the Home tab.
2) Enter stacks, blinds on the first page.
3) Select ICM as equity model, enter the prize structure.
4) Click Next on the bottom of the page to get to the betting setup.
5) Check the left box in the "Limping" line to allow BU to flat call. Leave everything else on that page empty/unchecked. Leave Commitment Threshold at 100%.
6) Click Finish to calculate the hand.

If you still have troubles please post a screenshot of where you get stuck.

Hi, I play spin & go max at pokerstars and realized a few days ago HRC had a feature which can be useful for this format which ICMIZER doesn't have.

I'm talking about the "Increase blinds and antes to X after Y hands" feature. I figured you could just leave the blinds as they are and set antes to an amount that covers all players stacks to simulate an auto all in for all players after x amount of hands.

The sad thing is that I'm getting some outcomes that don't make sense to me so I'm not sure if I should buy the software.

Could anyone tell me if this feature can be used in the way I'm trying to?

Here's a SS of what I'm talking about https://gyazo.com/267d2f2ce012e1c8b0b98bac87f1e0f3

I wouldn't recommend that, no.

FGS calculates with max 3 players all-in, if you use antes like that then some players will be straight up eliminated without seeing a showdown.

Guys, sorry in advance if this question was earlier or I'm stupid to understand.

How do I correctly calculate a PKO mtt hand in hrc? I need chip\ev calculation, as it is in the middle of the mtt.
1. I'm choosing FGS; the first place is set as default $100 and it gives me one result.
2. All right, I'm setting the remaing prize pool as for first place and the number of total chips left in the tournament. And it shows me another result.
3. Then I'm checking the same hand without bounties and the result is tighter than the first result and looser than the second one.

Which method is right? I suppose it's the second one, but not always you have the information about chips left and remaining pzpool
(or may be there is another easier method ?)

p.s.: The same question but for icm. What do I better use for mtt: malmuth icm or mtt icm?

Thanks in advance.